1. My mistake - you can obviously use the angle of approach as per 2-J-something or other (the bit about visual equivalents), but that musn't be the angle of approach procedure?
2. A really good point and a fog lifter for me - you have to watch those visual illusions!!!
3. I think I get this. Maybe. But don't ask me to explain it!
4. I get this.
5. But still, you'll only get true visual covering if the plane is so steep it's an eye plane!!! Nonetheless, as the clubhead gets close to the ground it will start to approximately cover the plane line visually (right?). I see now that it won't vertically cover it for reason 2 above.
Chris
2-J-3 is describing the Angle of Approach procedure. There is an Angle of Approach line inscribed on every Inclined Plane, whether it's Open, Square or Closed, hence this Angle of Approach is being traced as long as the Club is On Plane. However, this does not mean you're using the Angle of Approach procedure, i.e. using Angle of Approach as a Delivery Line (Guide Line) for the Clubhead. Reviewing my previous post may clarify this.
You should get visual covering by the Clubhead of the Angle of Approach approximately one feet forward/back of the ball. Always confirm by monitoring the blur of Clubhead path. Yes, it requires a steeper Plane Angle. See Ted Fort's pitch.
The Angle of Approach procedure can only be used with 10-5-E. However, the converse of this statement is not necessarily true. It is absolutely possible to use a Closed Plane Line (10-5-E) without using the Angle of Approach procedure. In this case, there is no need to 'cover' this Closed Plane Line, which may or may not be the proxy for the Angle of Approach (this is irrelevant). A Swinger wishing to impart Hook Spin on the ball would do just that (combined with a relatively more forward ball location).
I think my confusion stems from whether we're talking about the angle of approach on the inclined plane, or it's visual equivalent on the ground. For 10-5-E, the one on the ground is the reference for constructing a new plane line, right? But once you've got the new plane line, forget both the old plane, and any new angle of approach visual equivalent. Trace the new plane line and the clubhead will (approximately) visually cover the (old visual equivalent) angle of approach through the bottom of it's arc.
I think I have further confusion stemming from the fact that not only does the clubhead have a path that can be described in various ways, but so too do the hands have a path, which can be described in the same way. So for example, in the 10-5-E procedure, does the right forearm operate parallel to the old (clubhead) angle of approach (that is the new planeline, and so directly behind the club), or does it have a new angle of approach? I'm guessing the former. If so, would the latter be using the closed plane line without using the "angle of approach procedure"?
I think my confusion stems from whether we're talking about the angle of approach on the inclined plane, or it's visual equivalent on the ground. For 10-5-E, the one on the ground is the reference for constructing a new plane line, right? But once you've got the new plane line, forget both the old plane, and any new angle of approach visual equivalent. Trace the new plane line and the clubhead will (approximately) visually cover the (old visual equivalent) angle of approach through the bottom of it's arc.
I think I have further confusion stemming from the fact that not only does the clubhead have a path that can be described in various ways, but so too do the hands have a path, which can be described in the same way. So for example, in the 10-5-E procedure, does the right forearm operate parallel to the old (clubhead) angle of approach (that is the new planeline, and so directly behind the club), or does it have a new angle of approach? I'm guessing the former. If so, would the latter be using the closed plane line without using the "angle of approach procedure"?
Chris
The Angle of Approach that the player sees on the ground represents the actual Angle of Approach insribed on the face of the Inclined Plane. Hence from the player's visual perspective, they the same.
Yes, you disregard the old Plane Line once the new 10-5-E Closed Plane Line (proxy to the Angle of Approach of the old Plane) has been set.
Once 10-5-E has been established, the player tries to visually cover it with his clubhead. In doing so, what actually happens is that he is tracing his new 10-5-E Closed Plane Line. Remember, every stroke must have a Straight Plane Line being traced (whether or not your are actually trying to trace it), and you are tracing the 10-5-E Plane Line if you're using 10-5-E.
As you have correctly stated, the hands must necessarily travel on a different path when using the new Plane Line, simply because the whole Inclined Plane has rotated, and the Hands always travel down that Plane.
The Right Forearm must always trace a Plane Line, regardless if it's Open, Square or Closed. If you're using 10-5-E, your Right Forearm will be tracing 10-5-E. In other words, you would set up your Right Forearm Angle of Approach (which is a different concept to the Impact-Low Point Angle of Approach concept) on 10-5-E. Ideally, with your Clubshaft in-line with your Right Forearm, you should automatically be tracing 10-5-E by using the Clubhead to cover the new Plane Line (The Angle of Approach procedure).
Using the Closed Plane Line without the Angle of Approach procedure simply means that you are not using the Angle of Approach as a Delivery Line to guide the path of your Clubhead. Hence there is no need to 'cover' the Closed Plane Line. In either case, your Right Forearm is always tracing the base of the Inclined Plane.
tongzilla:
"The Angle of Approach procedure requires a Closed Plane Line per 10-5-E"
Since Ted is using an open stance not 10-5-E, therefore he is not using the angle of approach?
Closed Plane Line.
10-5-E may be used with Open, Square or Closed stance lines, which is independent of Plane Line direction. These stance line variations are all classified under 10-5-E.
Assuming that I am using an angle of approach, how do you know which stance should be used for what shot? The reason I am asking is that I still experimenting and any comments will definitely solve my puzzle. On 3, 5, 7 woods, I been using closed stance and the shot is great. But for 6, 7 iron shots sometimes I hit the top. I am not sure if that is due to the lie or the stance. On wedge shot, however I am using a square stance.
The closed stance for wood shots allow me to hit with my right forearm! I am still learning..
Assuming that I am using an angle of approach, how do you know which stance should be used for what shot? The reason I am asking is that I still experimenting and any comments will definitely solve my puzzle. On 3, 5, 7 woods, I been using closed stance and the shot is great. But for 6, 7 iron shots sometimes I hit the top. I am not sure if that is due to the lie or the stance. On wedge shot, however I am using a square stance.
The closed stance for wood shots allow me to hit with my right forearm! I am still learning..
Usually, players prefer an Open stance for shorter strokes, and then gradually becoming more Closed as you hit longer clubs. However, Open stance does not have to be restricted to shorter shots, and Closed stance does not have to be restricted to longer shots. Open stance promotes shorter backstroke pivot, and opposite is true for Closed stance. Your stance really has nothing to do with the Angle of Approach procedure. For now, I suggest you use whatever stance line that gives you the best results. However, always establish your Plane Line exactly the way you want it before every shot!
There are guys around here with a lot of real teaching experience. Maybe they can share the relative merits of different stance/plane line combinations.
Hybrid Mode
